Talk:RapidWeaver

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The links are not a directory but like the old page are intended to be a comprehensive, thorough listing of external links and information on themes and plugins. It is not in anyway used for advertising or promotion. Either way I was going to compile the list, but I figured it would be something that nearly everyone would want access to, and so I decided to share the work that I was planning on doing.

DIRECTORY 1. I am not using Wikipedia to list loosely associated topics 2. I am not listing genealogical entries or phone book entries 3. I am listing directory entries, TV/Radio guides, or resources for conducting business.

LISTING 1. The sites are not personal web sites or blogs (Even if a few are personal websites the same links existed on the old rapidweaver page). 2. I am not affiliated with any of these links. 3. The intention is NOT, nor does that page exist to attract visitors to a website or to promote a site. Ultimately, it is a reference to serve RapidWeaver users not the 3rd party developers or any other interest.

I don't feel that any of the external links are inappropriate. I am simply expanding on the external links (of 3rd party themes and plugins) that were on the old page. Previously, there was a list of external links to these developers. I am simply expanding on that by providing hopefully an end-all be-all type reference page detailing all the plugins and themes available, by who, for how much and how to access the pages. In addition, I haven't composed the article in a biased way. I think the page will be a valuable resource for any RapidWeaver user and will be a enhancing tool. The price is done is a non-biased way and is not intended to promote any particular company/service, beside RapidWeaver.

After I complete the page, I will be more than happy to move the added info to my personal page if you still desire.

I hope this works.

[edit] Quality tag - Reason for Adding

While this article is appreciated, it really reads as a promo piece, e.g., talking about how easy it is to use it to create “fine-looking” sites. Such claims are not verifiable and are besides the point: surely I can use RapidWeaver to create horrendously ugly sites just as well as I can use it to make nice sites. It will serve the product better if a more neutral, less excited tone is adopted because the promotional tone in Wikipedia serves to undermine credibility. -Fenevad 03:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Since the program is theme-based, you'd have to create a horrendously ugly theme first. ;-) But you're right, it's worded a bit "excited". Fixed. -Stormwatch (talk) 20:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)